If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Think Progress)   Kansas requires teachers to lie about catastrophic climate change, Fark to create a Brownbackistan tag   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 212
    More: Asinine, runaway climate change, Brownbackistan, Fark, Kansas, American Legislative Exchange Council, National Center for Science Education, teachers  
•       •       •

4207 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Feb 2013 at 11:53 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



212 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-19 10:28:32 AM  
*sniff*

What is that awful smell?

Last week, the Kansas House Education Committee introduced a bill that mandates teachers question the scientific basis of global warming, becoming the latest state to take up one of American Legislative Exchange Council's "model bills" aiming to misrepresent climate change in schools.

Ah, Farking ALEC again.

Gawdammitsomuch.

There's ignorance and then there's willful ignorance and now there's legislated ignorance.

No doubt it's major energy concerns backing this BS trying to stave off the inevitable.
 
2013-02-19 10:41:32 AM  
These idiots can bring up their kids any way they wish. Meanwhile the rest of the world is moving on without them.

Good luck with that.
 
2013-02-19 10:41:54 AM  
I hope they'll ignore the increase in tornadoes and droughts, too

/and since they're all boot-strappy, they won't be needing any outside assistance
//outlaw FEMA while you're at it
 
2013-02-19 10:43:24 AM  
(a) The state board of education shall provide a course of
instruction in science. Such course of instruction shall:
(1) Provide information to students of scientific evidence which both
supports and counters a scientific theory or hypothesis; and
(2) assist students in developing critical thinking skills to evaluate
scientific theories or hypotheses.
(b) The legislature recognizes that the teaching of certain scientific
topics, such as climate science, may be controversial. The legislature
encourages the teaching of such scientific controversies to be made in an
objective manner in which both the strengths and weaknesses of such
scientific theory or hypothesis are covered


Wait, the people who want to teach critical thinking skills and cover science objectively are the bad guys now?

It's important to understand the science you're studying, not just to accept it based on 97% of experts accepting it.  You need to understand why they accept it, and part of that understanding means asking and answering the same questions they did.

/Calling out global warming as particularly controversial is kind of stupid, but how do you go about construing this as an order to lie to students?  "Here's the theory.  Here's the arguments for it.  Here's the arguments against it.  Here's why the arguments against it are wrong".
 
2013-02-19 10:53:01 AM  
The legislature recognizes that the teaching of certain scientific topics, such as climate science, may be controversial.

"Climate science" is controversial now? Not just global warming?

There you have it folks: Kansas wants to teach your kids that rain dances cause rain, and tornadoes are caused by the exhalations of angry angels.
 
2013-02-19 11:02:05 AM  

serial_crusher: (a) The state board of education shall provide a course of
instruction in science. Such course of instruction shall:
(1) Provide information to students of scientific evidence which both
supports and counters a scientific theory or hypothesis; and
(2) assist students in developing critical thinking skills to evaluate
scientific theories or hypotheses.
(b) The legislature recognizes that the teaching of certain scientific
topics, such as climate science, may be controversial. The legislature
encourages the teaching of such scientific controversies to be made in an
objective manner in which both the strengths and weaknesses of such
scientific theory or hypothesis are covered

Wait, the people who want to teach critical thinking skills and cover science objectively are the bad guys now?

It's important to understand the science you're studying, not just to accept it based on 97% of experts accepting it.  You need to understand why they accept it, and part of that understanding means asking and answering the same questions they did.

/Calling out global warming as particularly controversial is kind of stupid, but how do you go about construing this as an order to lie to students?  "Here's the theory.  Here's the arguments for it.  Here's the arguments against it.  Here's why the arguments against it are wrong".


Do you accept that lead is toxic and bad for your health to ingest?  Do you understand the science behind it and how they calculate the acceptable toxicity levels of it or do you just accept the dominant scientific theory?
 
2013-02-19 11:02:52 AM  
But a message from Obama to schoolkids telling them to work hard in school is indoctrination.
 
2013-02-19 11:04:07 AM  

gilgigamesh: The legislature recognizes that the teaching of certain scientific topics, such as climate science, may be controversial.

"Climate science" is controversial now? Not just global warming?

There you have it folks: Kansas wants to teach your kids that rain dances cause rain, and tornadoes are caused by the exhalations of angry angels.


This.  The fact that Canada is colder than the US because of exposure to less sunlight is just a theory.  Right up there with that whole gravity thing.
 
2013-02-19 11:04:57 AM  

gilgigamesh: The legislature recognizes that the teaching of certain scientific topics, such as climate science, may be controversial.

"Climate science" is controversial now? Not just global warming?

There you have it folks: Kansas wants to teach your kids that rain dances cause rain, and tornadoes are caused by the exhalations of angry angels.


Texans were told to pray for rain. Loons will be loons.
 
2013-02-19 11:10:23 AM  

mrshowrules: This.  The fact that Canada is colder than the US because of exposure to less sunlight is just a theory.


I am being persecuted.  I want equal time for my theory that Canada is colder because its closer to the cold, cold belly of the cosmic turtle that bears the Earth Disc through the aether.
 
2013-02-19 11:12:42 AM  

quatchi: There's ignorance and then there's willful ignorance and now there's legislated ignorance.


One causes the other.
 
2013-02-19 11:13:40 AM  

gilgigamesh: mrshowrules: This.  The fact that Canada is colder than the US because of exposure to less sunlight is just a theory.

I am being persecuted.  I want equal time for my theory that Canada is colder because its closer to the cold, cold belly of the cosmic turtle that bears the Earth Disc through the aether.


Or because Americans hearts are full of freedom which is warm by nature.
 
2013-02-19 11:16:22 AM  

mrshowrules: gilgigamesh: mrshowrules: This.  The fact that Canada is colder than the US because of exposure to less sunlight is just a theory.

I am being persecuted.  I want equal time for my theory that Canada is colder because its closer to the cold, cold belly of the cosmic turtle that bears the Earth Disc through the aether.

Or because Americans hearts are full of freedom which is warm by nature.


Yes! That... that too.

Also, the turtle's name is "Frank".

Come on, Kansas.  Certify me to teach!
 
2013-02-19 11:18:17 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: I hope they'll ignore the increase in tornadoes and droughts, too

/and since they're all boot-strappy, they won't be needing any outside assistance
//outlaw FEMA while you're at it


You know how I know you have no farking clue what you're talking about?

www1.ncdc.noaa.gov

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-02-19 11:19:00 AM  
"So, you see children, the fact that last July was the hottest month in recorded history and high temperature records are being shattered nationwide is because of one undeniable fact: Jesus is hugging us EXTRA hard because of Gay Marriage. This WILL be on the test."
 
2013-02-19 11:20:04 AM  

mrshowrules: Do you accept that lead is toxic and bad for your health to ingest? Do you understand the science behind it and how they calculate the acceptable toxicity levels of it or do you just accept the dominant scientific theory?


I understood those things when I studied them in high school chemistry, but I admit it's been a while and I haven't retained that knowledge.  If my high school chemistry teacher had just said "lead is bad, mkay", she would have been doing a terrible job.

"Listen to smart people" is great advice when you have to make a decision and don't have time or motivation to educate yourself, but that's kind of the opposite of what schools are for.
 
2013-02-19 11:21:12 AM  

DesertDemonWY: MaudlinMutantMollusk: I hope they'll ignore the increase in tornadoes and droughts, too

/and since they're all boot-strappy, they won't be needing any outside assistance
//outlaw FEMA while you're at it

You know how I know you have no farking clue what you're talking about?

[www1.ncdc.noaa.gov image 850x637]

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 847x692]


There's the proof for my theory.  Right there.

1974 happens to be the year that I got drunk, stood on the hood of a Chevy, and loudly and repeatedly proclaimed my rejection of the Holy Ghost.
 
2013-02-19 11:21:30 AM  
Science is political for both sides of the spectrum

This is not new

Whether you deny the existence of global warming or deny the safety of nuclear power you are still a moron
 
2013-02-19 11:23:11 AM  

DesertDemonWY: MaudlinMutantMollusk: I hope they'll ignore the increase in tornadoes and droughts, too

/and since they're all boot-strappy, they won't be needing any outside assistance
//outlaw FEMA while you're at it

You know how I know you have no farking clue what you're talking about?

[www1.ncdc.noaa.gov image 850x637]

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 847x692]


Oh look, it's time for cherry-picked data again.  These facts are inconvenient for you, but tornadoes do not start at F3, and more of the US was under drought last year than any other time in recorded history.  A drought that your cherry-picked chart doesn't include since you made sure to find one that ended a few years back.
 
2013-02-19 11:25:24 AM  

serial_crusher: mrshowrules: Do you accept that lead is toxic and bad for your health to ingest? Do you understand the science behind it and how they calculate the acceptable toxicity levels of it or do you just accept the dominant scientific theory?

I understood those things when I studied them in high school chemistry, but I admit it's been a while and I haven't retained that knowledge.  If my high school chemistry teacher had just said "lead is bad, mkay", she would have been doing a terrible job.

"Listen to smart people" is great advice when you have to make a decision and don't have time or motivation to educate yourself, but that's kind of the opposite of what schools are for.


So teach the controversy even if there isn't one.
 
2013-02-19 11:25:37 AM  

cman: deny the safety of nuclear power


Yeah.  What's the big deal about three major meltdowns in thirty years?
 
2013-02-19 11:27:31 AM  
I was quite hopeful that  Django Unchained would lead to a resurgence in interest in phrenology.
 
2013-02-19 11:31:52 AM  

GAT_00: Oh look, it's time for cherry-picked data again.  These facts are inconvenient for you, but tornadoes do not start at F3, and more of the US was under drought last year than any other time in recorded history.  A drought that your cherry-picked chart doesn't include since you made sure to find one that ended a few years back.


Careful. The tornado chart abovee is from NOAA's website:  http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/severeweather/tornadoes.html#hist o ry

Additionally, here is a drought occurrence chart over the last 500 years, also from NOAA's website.http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/drought/drght_500years.html

www.ncdc.noaa.gov
 
2013-02-19 11:34:29 AM  

GAT_00: Oh look, it's time for cherry-picked data again.  These facts are inconvenient for you, but tornadoes do not start at F3, and more of the US was under drought last year than any other time in recorded history.  A drought that your cherry-picked chart doesn't include since you made sure to find one that ended a few years back.


waterwatch.usgs.gov

Over the climate time scales "droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century."

Improved tornado observation practices have led to an increase in the number of reported weaker tornadoes, and in recent years the number of EF-0 and EF-1 tornadoes have become more prevelant in the total number of reported tornadoes.
 
2013-02-19 11:42:24 AM  

gilgigamesh: cman: deny the safety of nuclear power

Yeah.  What's the big deal about three major meltdowns in thirty years?


http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/the-china-post/special-to-the -c hina-post/2011/04/13/298445/Nuclear-power.htm

Straight out of the mouth from a well known leftist hippy who is big on climate change activism

But, go ahead, deny science and act like only the other side is bad
 
2013-02-19 11:49:08 AM  

DesertDemonWY: GAT_00: Oh look, it's time for cherry-picked data again.  These facts are inconvenient for you, but tornadoes do not start at F3, and more of the US was under drought last year than any other time in recorded history.  A drought that your cherry-picked chart doesn't include since you made sure to find one that ended a few years back.

[waterwatch.usgs.gov image 506x319]

Over the climate time scales "droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century."

Improved tornado observation practices have led to an increase in the number of reported weaker tornadoes, and in recent years the number of EF-0 and EF-1 tornadoes have become more prevelant in the total number of reported tornadoes.


And there's the standard 13 year image.

make me some tea: The tornado chart abovee is from NOAA's website:


I'm aware where he got it from.  But considering only F3 and above tornadoes to make claims about all tornadoes is stupid.
 
2013-02-19 11:51:00 AM  

cman: gilgigamesh: cman: deny the safety of nuclear power

Yeah.  What's the big deal about three major meltdowns in thirty years?

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/the-china-post/special-to-the -c hina-post/2011/04/13/298445/Nuclear-power.htm

Straight out of the mouth from a well known leftist hippy who is big on climate change activism

But, go ahead, deny science and act like only the other side is bad


I didn't dismiss it as a bad alternative.  I disputed your assertion that nuclear power is "safe".

Your appeal to authority and attempt to threadjack isn't convincing.  Nuclear power is not safe.  But it is cheap, safER than ongoing reliance on coal, and presently available.  In short, it is an imperfect solution.

But "safe"?  Come on.

And yes, only one side is, comparatively, bad.  Democratic legislatures are not pushing an agenda to teach lies to school kids.
 
2013-02-19 11:57:06 AM  

serial_crusher: Here's why the arguments against it are wrong".


And then conservative parents backed by conservative legal funds file suit that says you violated the law by not being objective.

The point of these laws is to give conservatives the ability to harass school districts and make it too risky to address the issue honestly.
 
2013-02-19 11:58:14 AM  

GAT_00: And there's the standard 13 year image.


You've been shown that one, a 500 year graph, a 100+ year graph and that's all you got? LET ME LAUGH EVEN HARDER

GAT_00: I'm aware where he got it from.  But considering only F3 and above tornadoes to make claims about all tornadoes is stupid.


What is stupid is claiming that tornadoes are becoming more intense and frequent without offering any proof
 
2013-02-19 11:59:44 AM  
They claim it is to create healthy skepticism and teach critical thinking skills.  If that were true why do they only legislate this crap when it conflicts with evolution/climate change.  Lets teach the children these skills by critically testing the theories of the Bible and watch these mouth breathers spaz.
 
2013-02-19 12:03:38 PM  

gilgigamesh: cman: deny the safety of nuclear power

Yeah.  What's the big deal about three major meltdowns in thirty years?


One of those three "major" meltdowns (a term which implies the existence of "minor" meltdowns, but I digress) was caused by the techs deliberately disabling the safety devices in order to increase power.

Another one of those three was caused the facility being torn asunder by the fourth-most powerful earthquake in the history of a nation built on a major fault line, followed a few minutes later by a million gallons of salt water rushing through the now-exposed interior.
 
2013-02-19 12:04:13 PM  
Don't worry, when your kids graduate and want to attend a univ outside of Kansas I am sure they will have a solid understanding of scientific methods.

//that sound your heard was universities everywhere deleting KS from the state drop-down choices
 
2013-02-19 12:09:22 PM  

DesertDemonWY: What is stupid is claiming that tornadoes are becoming more intense and frequent without offering any proof


It's happening more in the Southern Hemisphere than in the Northern but it *is* happening.

Using NCEP-2 reanalysis data, Lim and Simmonds (2002) showed that for 1979 to 1999, increasing trends in the annual number of explosively developing (deepening by 1 hPa per hour or more) extratropical cyclones are significant in the SH and over the globe (0.56 and 0.78 more systems per year, respectively), while the positive trend did not achieve significance in the NH. Simmonds and Keay (2002) obtained similar results for the change in the number of cyclones in the decile for deepest cyclones averaged over the North Pacific and over the North Atlantic in winter over the period 1958 to 1997.

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch3s3-8-4.html
 
2013-02-19 12:11:19 PM  

GAT_00: DesertDemonWY: GAT_00: Oh look, it's time for cherry-picked data again.  These facts are inconvenient for you, but tornadoes do not start at F3, and more of the US was under drought last year than any other time in recorded history.  A drought that your cherry-picked chart doesn't include since you made sure to find one that ended a few years back.

[waterwatch.usgs.gov image 506x319]

Over the climate time scales "droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century."

Improved tornado observation practices have led to an increase in the number of reported weaker tornadoes, and in recent years the number of EF-0 and EF-1 tornadoes have become more prevelant in the total number of reported tornadoes.

And there's the standard 13 year image.

make me some tea: The tornado chart abovee is from NOAA's website:

I'm aware where he got it from.  But considering only F3 and above tornadoes to make claims about all tornadoes is stupid.


The total numbers may be rising because of improved detection/reporting, but also because tornados are more frequent.
We simply haven't had the current level of detection technology for long enough to make anything more than a guess.


www.spc.noaa.gov
 
2013-02-19 12:12:07 PM  
I'm so glad the GOP is laser-focused on jobs!

See, also, this.
 
2013-02-19 12:12:18 PM  

gilgigamesh: mrshowrules: gilgigamesh: mrshowrules: This.  The fact that Canada is colder than the US because of exposure to less sunlight is just a theory.

I am being persecuted.  I want equal time for my theory that Canada is colder because its closer to the cold, cold belly of the cosmic turtle that bears the Earth Disc through the aether.

Or because Americans hearts are full of freedom which is warm by nature.

Yes! That... that too.

Also, the turtle's name is "Frank".



C'mon, everybody knows the turtle's name is Mitch.

/Founder, KERM (Kentuckians Embarassed by Rand and Mitch)
 
2013-02-19 12:14:59 PM  

make me some tea: These idiots can bring up their kids any way they wish. Meanwhile the rest of the world is moving on without them.

Good luck with that.


I like to think of it this way: eventually, Kansas will turn into Mexico, and then midwesterners won't have to go all the way to the southern border for their cheap drugs and hookers.  So, Kansans get their freedum, and everyone else gets a nice centralized location to go slumming.  It's a win-win!
 
2013-02-19 12:17:35 PM  
The Climateers say that Climate Change is making the fish move North, but here in Australia the fish are moving South!  Obviously, the fish have never heard of this Climate Change.  LOL.
 
2013-02-19 12:18:38 PM  
You mean the same folks who want to "teach the controversy" by putting creationism on the same level as evolution?  I'm shocked really.
 
2013-02-19 12:20:37 PM  

give me doughnuts: GAT_00: DesertDemonWY: GAT_00: Oh look, it's time for cherry-picked data again.  These facts are inconvenient for you, but tornadoes do not start at F3, and more of the US was under drought last year than any other time in recorded history.  A drought that your cherry-picked chart doesn't include since you made sure to find one that ended a few years back.

[waterwatch.usgs.gov image 506x319]

Over the climate time scales "droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century."

Improved tornado observation practices have led to an increase in the number of reported weaker tornadoes, and in recent years the number of EF-0 and EF-1 tornadoes have become more prevelant in the total number of reported tornadoes.

And there's the standard 13 year image.

make me some tea: The tornado chart abovee is from NOAA's website:

I'm aware where he got it from.  But considering only F3 and above tornadoes to make claims about all tornadoes is stupid.

The total numbers may be rising because of improved detection/reporting, but also because tornados are more frequent.
We simply haven't had the current level of detection technology for long enough to make anything more than a guess.


Indeed. There are plenty of other metrics with which to measure climate change anyway, CO2 levels being the most obvious scientifically, and also the most readily available in historical data.
 
2013-02-19 12:20:40 PM  
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
― Neil deGrasse Tyson
 
2013-02-19 12:22:08 PM  

The Name: make me some tea: These idiots can bring up their kids any way they wish. Meanwhile the rest of the world is moving on without them.

Good luck with that.

I like to think of it this way: eventually, Kansas will turn into Mexico, and then midwesterners won't have to go all the way to the southern border for their cheap drugs and hookers.  So, Kansans get their freedum, and everyone else gets a nice centralized location to go slumming.  It's a win-win!


It's a shame, because Kansas is, or at least was, toward the top rank in public education by state.
 
2013-02-19 12:22:15 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: "So, you see children, the fact that last July was the hottest month in recorded history and high temperature records are being shattered nationwide is because of one undeniable fact: Jesus is hugging us EXTRA hard because of Gay Marriage. This WILL be on the test."


Bravo.
 
2013-02-19 12:23:44 PM  

DesertDemonWY:

Over the climate time scales "droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century."

In Texas, we're going on our second year in a row for "execptional" drought. 2009 was pretty bad, 2010 was a wet anomaly.

2012 was flat out horrible.

2013, we're under burn bans, and there's no prospect for any significant rain any time soon.

Reservoirs are at 1/3 of their capacity or lower.

In conclusion, shorter and less frequent my ass.




i865.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-19 12:26:14 PM  
Nothing so clearly demonstrates the danger of right-wing nutjobs as their unrelenting desire to treat Science as merely a matter of opinion.
 
2013-02-19 12:29:33 PM  
Severe hurricane/More hurricanes? It's climate change! Better get used to it!

Followed by several years of low hurricane activity, which has been the pattern forever. You're suppose to forget the "experts" said the hurricanes were because of climate change and would be a regular thing now.

Low snowfall? It's climate change! More snowfall? Climate change! More rain? Climate change! Less rain? Climate change! It's the answer to whatever weather phenomenon is in the news right now.

I'm still waiting for the "hundreds of thousands" of climate change refuges the "experts" at the UN swore we would have by now and if you doubted them you were "denying SCIENCE" and then there were the "experts" who warned us that snow was going to be a thing of the past by now in many areas. The only problem with trying to teach kids the ins and outs of climate change science is that to really understand them you're going to need considerably more than a high school level education.

Yes, the earth is getting warmer, no, we are not causing it or helping it go faster by any real measure. All that pollution is having other negative affects on the environment but since they can't be boiled down in to simple ideas to scare people with and thus can't be used for an agenda that has nothing to do with the environment.... Well, they're just not that important. As much as I hate to beat the 'religion' angle to death in one day a lot of the "global warming" people remind me so much of the Christians shrieking about how I'm going to "burn in hell".
 
2013-02-19 12:29:56 PM  
John D. Rockefeller has been dead for 75 years and he still hold more sway over policy in the US government than the current president.

That is power.
 
2013-02-19 12:30:45 PM  

give me doughnuts: The total numbers may be rising because of improved detection/reporting, but also because tornados are more frequent.


That's hard to say definitively.  For example, I recently saw a presentation that convincingly showed that over the last 50 years, more tornadoes have been seen in rural Kansas, markedly more.  Population data would say that rural Kansas has been declining in people for those same 50 years.  It may be that stormchasers are skewing reports.
 
2013-02-19 12:35:22 PM  

serial_crusher: Wait, the people who want to teach critical thinking skills and cover science objectively are the bad guys now?

It's important to understand the science you're studying, not just to accept it based on 97% of experts accepting it. You need to understand why they accept it, and part of that understanding means asking and answering the same questions they did.

/Calling out global warming as particularly controversial is kind of stupid, but how do you go about construing this as an order to lie to students? "Here's the theory. Here's the arguments for it. Here's the arguments against it. Here's why the arguments against it are wrong".


Proposals to 'teach the controversy' usually require teachers to not include that 'here's why the arguments are wrong' bit.
And if we know they're wrong, why teach them in the first place?  When kids learn math the teacher doesn't include a lesson on how some people think 1 + 1 = 3.
 
2013-02-19 12:36:49 PM  

GAT_00: give me doughnuts: The total numbers may be rising because of improved detection/reporting, but also because tornados are more frequent.

That's hard to say definitively.  For example, I recently saw a presentation that convincingly showed that over the last 50 years, more tornadoes have been seen in rural Kansas, markedly more.  Population data would say that rural Kansas has been declining in people for those same 50 years.  It may be that stormchasers are skewing reports.


The number of storms does not matter if you believe it is god's will
 
Displayed 50 of 212 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report